9/11 Unmasked: A Remarkable Review

David Ray Griffin

The book 9/11 Unmasked, which I wrote together with Elizabeth Woodworth, has received several excellent reviews. But the most remarkable of these was written by Philip Roddis, who in 2016 had written with vitriol (his term) about the idea that 9/11 was an “inside job.” He wrote: “9/11 Truthism is not only seriously crackers but reactionary too.” What is remarkable about Roddis’ 2018 review is the extent to which he reversed his previous position.

Introduction

Roddis’ reversal began after seeing responses to his 2016 piece. Most of the responses simply confirmed Roddis’ long-held “contempt” for 9/11 truthers. He had felt this contempt – he recently realized – because he had been “exposed only to lazy, simplistic and epistemologically naive truthers.” Put otherwise, Roddis admitted that his “exposure to truthism had come from armchair conspiracists too idle or brain fogged to put together a decent argument.” Given his long-held certainty that the truthers could not be taken seriously, he had felt no need to “engage with evidential flaws in the official account.” So sure had I been of the logic of my case,” Roddis admitted, I’d seen little or no need to address the empirical underpinnings of [the truthers.]

Contempt for truthers had been expressed by many other critics. For example, British political writer George Monbiot said that the 9/11 truth movement consists of morons and “idiots” who believe in “magic.” Calling me the 9/11 movement’s “high priest,” Monbiot described my 9/11 writing as a “concatenation of ill-attested nonsense.”

Likewise, in an essay entitled “The 9/11 Conspiracy Nuts,” Alexander Cockburn used me to illustrate the “idiocy of the conspiracy nuts.” In a follow-up essay, Cockburn wrote: “The main engine of the 9/11 conspiracy cult is nothing [but] the death of any conception of evidence.” Because of their failure to understand the idea of evidence, truthers illustrate the “ascendancy of magic over common sense, let alone reason.”

Matthew Rothschild, the editor of the Progressive, was equally dismissive in an essay entitled “Enough of the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories, Already.” Referring to me as the “guru of the 9/11 conspiracy movement,” Rothschild wrote:

Not every riddle that Griffin and other conspiracists pose has a ready answer. But almost all of their major assertions are baseless…At bottom, the 9/11 conspiracy theories are profoundly irrational and unscientific.

Whereas critics such as Monbiot and Cockburn have treated all critics of the official account of 9/11 as equally nutty and idiotic, Roddis noticed a distinction with regard to the truthers who criticized his vitriolic article. Although many of them could be easily dismissed, there were also “voices of reason from dudes who’d done their homework and whose tones were sober.”

This distinction was implicit in a Michael Moore quip:

Now, I’m not into conspiracy theories, except the ones that are true.”

In any case, having become aware that there may be such a distinction, Roddis “promised to re-assess the truther case and return either to concede and apologize or reaffirm my views with better arguments.”

Roddis’ Evaluation

Roddis’ evaluation of 9/11 Unmasked is here summarized in terms of seven issues he discussed.

1. One of the basic questions addressed by Roddis is whether 9/11 Unmasked, “by its detailed evidence and reasoning,” crossed “the threshold for being taken seriously?” Roddis replied: “I say it does.”

2. With regard to the attempt to discover the truth about 9/11, Roddis said: “One irreducible and most essential task is to expose the manifest inadequacy of the official narrative.” Except for a few minor problems, said Roddis, Griffin and Woodworth “have acquitted themselves admirably on that front. So admirably that I’ve been forced,” Roddis added, “to reexamine the logic of my own assumptions.”

3. His previous contempt for 9/11 truthers, Roddis admitted, had led him to assume that he “needn’t engage with evidential flaws in the official account.” This is crucial: A few people have, almost from the beginning, been pointing out problems in the official account. But no matter how convincingly such critiques have shown that the official account could not possibly be true, most people have simply chosen not to study these critiques, at least with an even 30% open mind, because of the contempt for “truthers” they had been taught to have.

4. Besides criticizing his previous position, Roddis also rejected another way of refusing to deal with flaws in the official account of 9/11 – a way that will likely continue to give people permission to ignore the evidence provided by the 9/11 Truth Movement:

eminent psychologists who’ve never – as I’d never – deigned to engage with evidential details will continue to publish acclaimed drivel on the pathology and pitiable delusions of all conspiracy theorists, citing all 9/11 truthers as textbook examples.

5. The Griffin-Woodworth book is built around the “best evidence” against claims made by the official account of 9/11. No reply to the book’s 51 chapters of best evidence could possibly be satisfactory apart from an extensive examination of the evidence. Discussing what would be needed to respond to “the gauntlet Griffin and Woodworth have thrown down,” Roddis gave this answer:

an inquiry quite unprecedented – a truly independent panel with no-holds access to all materials and witnesses, and immune from intimidation by pretty much the most powerful interests on earth.

6. The official account of the World Trade Center (the Twin Towers and WTC 7) was provided by NIST – the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Expressing his strongest endorsement of 9/11 Unmasked, Roddis wrote: “this is as strong a prima facie case for throwing out NIST, and its predecessors, as ever confronted an official cover up.”

7. Roddis concluded his review by saying: “I’ll close – with this recommendation for all who deem, as I had, the 9/11 truther case too daft for serious consideration. Buy this book.”

Conclusion

Between 2016 and 2018, Philip Roddis underwent a remarkable transformation. Beginning with the conviction that 9/11 Truthism is “seriously crackers,” he ended up thinking that the book 9/11 Unmasked must be taken seriously and also that it provides a strong “prima facie case for throwing out NIST.”

This kind of reversal is one of the things that my co-author and I hoped would be produced by our book. We had long known that the evidence against the official account of 9/11 is convincing. For people to be actually convinced, they need only to be willing to examine the evidence. Roddis’ response to our book suggests that this is the case, even with people who had been hostile to the 9/11 Truth Movement.


newest oldest most voted
Notify of
tomratliff
Reader

Ron Unz covered this recently in one of his Pravda Series articles. The entire series his highly recommended reading. Please check it out. Search Ron Unz Review Pravda Series.

Also, Grenfell Tower. Now that was a building on fire. Yet it didn’t become pulverized and fall straight down like a droppped bowling ball. Not exceptional at al, at least for building experts such as structural engineers and architects.

tomratliff
Reader

excerpts: “…I’d also grown quite friendly with Alexander Cockburn, whose Counterpunch webzine seemed a very rare center of significant opposition to our disastrous foreign policy towards Iraq and Iran. I do recall that he once complained to me in 2006 about the “conspiracy nuts” of the 9/11 Truth movement who were endlessly harassing his publication, and I extended my sympathies. Each of us move in different political circles, and that brief reference may have been the first and only time I heard of the 9/11 Truthers during that period, causing me to regard them more like an eccentric UFO cult… Read more »

CH
Reader
CH

Dr. CH recommends a tonic: Read the World Socialist Web Site. Every day.

http://www.wsws.org

Mulga Mumblebrain
Reader
Mulga Mumblebrain

Alexander Cockburn was also an anthropogenic climate destabilisation denier, a true sign of the anti-intellectual and highly dangerous crack-pot.

Paul
Reader
Paul

The reasons why the mainstream media did not mention any of the 9/11 Truther theories, well you just have to look at who owns mainstream media sources like CNN and Fox News, they like many industry leaders always control the narrative. For example the Bilderberg conference last year 2017, Who’s attendees listed a multitude of media print and digital, financial services, investment management, private equity CEO’s, along with a plethora of former or current political figures in previous or current Washington DC administrations. Hence they control the agenda they control the narrative of all mainstream media and a lot of… Read more »

tomratliff
Reader

typo “…entire series is highly recommend…”

milosevic
Reader
milosevic

American Pravda: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-911-conspiracy-theories/

— concludes that Israel did it, which is quite impossible without the active collaboration of the US government, but this is important progress away from the Official Story.

This is on a conservative/libertarian website, in which environment 9/11 dissidence has been uncommon, until now.

entire “American Pravda” series:

http://www.unz.com/runz/our-american-pravda/#related-series

see especially articles on zionism/jewishness (regarding claims of “antisemitism”, the author is himself Jewish):

http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-oddities-of-the-jewish-religion/

http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-bolshevik-revolution-and-its-aftermath/

http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-anti-semitism-a-century-ago/

http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-jews-and-nazis/

http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-holocaust-denial/

axisofoil
Reader

This is a fairly good analysis of the situation we are in.

axisofoil
Reader

The link above has to be rewound to the beginning. Sorry about that.

SuzS
Reader
SuzS

Thank you Mr Griffin and Mr Roddis for quite a rare experience. I very much appreciated Roddis’ review for its fairminded preparedness to admit a profound change of perception. Mr Griffin follows that up with a very fine response. These two pieces are VERY important and should be widely read

Sally Lun
Reader
Sally Lun

David Griffin is one of my 911 heroes. Along with Kevin Ryan and Niels Harrit, discoverer of thermite in the WTC dust

Who are other people’s personal heroes?

Bryn Higgins
Reader
Bryn Higgins

I’m a fan of Ace Baker. Irreverent. Bit mental. But fun.

flaxgirl
Reader

As my understanding of the technical aspects of video is non-existent, the fact that I find his explanation of how they did the plane video fakery extremely credible may not mean very much. However, I suggest where he gets it wrong is that he states that the nose cone pops out the other side of the South tower due to “drift” with the implication that the fakers were unable to control it. He assumes, quite reasonably, that the nose cone popping out is some kind of screw up but it isn’t. It’s completely deliberate – the power elite mashing their… Read more »

axisofoil
Reader

Mark Walsh is not who he seems. There is no end to this rabbit hole. It is bottomless. Endless Like fractals. Seriously.

flaxgirl
Reader

He’s certainly a hired witness but he seems to really be Mark Walsh, aka, “Psycho Mark”. The brazenness of these people knows no bounds. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uO7MJnw5S4s. It was put out on the internet that the witness was actor, Mark Humphrey, from Canada (http://mydevotionalthoughts.net/2017/02/interview-with-actor-mark-humphrey-when-calls-the-heart.html) but I believe that was just ludicrous disinformation because he looks nothing like Mark Humphrey and is very obviously “Psycho Mark”.

axisofoil
Reader

Look closely at this. I caught it live while recording on 3 tv’s set on 3 different channels and still have the VHS tapes. It happened….or did it? I suppose I should pop the tapes in to make sure the Mandela effect hasn’t changed them. Just kidding – or am I?

CH
Reader
CH

Wow. I’ve watched these videos off and on since the day of 9/11, when I happened to be unemployed by our fine capitalist system and sat home all day watching the live TV coverage. But I didn’t think through the collapse of Building 7 for some three years afterward, whereupon I suddenly went, “Holy S***!” Now, in 2018, another aspect of that collapse that I never noticed is pointed out to me! Maybe the earlier videos I’d watched had been terminated early; maybe I just didn’t see it. Either way, this is interesting. But let me ask a question: If… Read more »

willi uebelherr
Reader
willi uebelherr

To axisofoil and bill and all. I thinks, all this with 9/11 is not a question of truth. All theoretical discussion, what we found, show us the physically impossibilities of the oficial story. The real problem seems to be, that the most people can’t live with this truth. You can see it with Noam Chomsky. For him it is impossible, that this event was designed with and from the state apparatus. And we can understand, that people without his deep inside view will have much more distance to accept that all this oficial stories are a big lying theatre. Of… Read more »

willi uebelherr
Reader
willi uebelherr

Not really, dear axisofoil. We can understand, that on this field we will never break the systems, that create this events for the global wars. We can recognise, that the most people will never defend the official story. The real change we can only organise based on her live basics. The real problem for us is, that only with the fighting against the lying and stupid explanation of any thing we will never be able to create together a real alternative. The money system is the core for slavery. The privatisation of information flows stabilise the systems. If the people… Read more »

axisofoil
Reader

Thanks,
I agree with you. One has to be prepared to live outside this reactionary and polarized world, at least where I live. I have gotten rather used to it now. Sometimes I jump in and comment for the entertainment of it all. Here, it is difficult to express with any effect, individual values and opinions. There is a social structure extremely focused on controlling the narrative. That control is getting tighter all the time.

axisofoil
Reader

Pretty sad state of affairs, isn’t it?

bill
Reader
bill

Nudging folk along seems sensible but truthers will just call what you have posted an anomaly or speculation… they wont endeavour to explain it or indeed any of the huge problems with CD because they have only 2 answers on their multiple choice test paper and they are hanging on to that paper for grim death,no matter what, because the criminals gotta pay, as they certainly should, but wont of course… …the only real remaining argument over what happened has been as debated at the Vancouver Conference….do they even suspect how much Z learnt from the errors of the Warren… Read more »

axisofoil
Reader

This particular posting was the issue that divided scholars for 9/11 truth. It was a big deal at the time. Steven Jones on one side of the debate, arguing for thermite and Jim Fetzer on the other side, arguing for directed energy weapons. The dissolving antenna was certainly interesting but served only to further divide the movement. What caused it? Who knows. Neither anomaly or speculation define what we see. Nearly everything that happened that day was in some respect not physically or rationally possible. There is still more hidden in plain sight. So far, discovery and facts don’t seem… Read more »

Eye Witness
Reader
Eye Witness

Steven Jones behaved shabbily toward Fetzer and ST911. He, Kevin Ryan and others combined to break the organisation far more than Fetzer ever did. Granted Jones received vicious attacks from some elements in the organisation,but that doesn’t excuse what he allowed to be done by his followers. No one has reason to be proud of that episode.

flaxgirl
Reader

Fascinating but wherever speculation is involved I think it best to not bother going there. Rather, stick to the essential facts that will get these people behind bars (doubt it will ever happen though) then THEY can explain it.

PainedScientist
Reader
PainedScientist

It was professor Steven Jones who first discovered thermite in the WTC dust, in 2006. Harrit was the lead author on the subsequent paper from 2009, detailing their findings

AJ
Reader
AJ

Steven Jones disappeared from the scene. Where is he?

axisofoil
Reader
flaxgirl
Reader

That is a very good question.

Makropulos
Reader
Makropulos

“What is remarkable about Roddis’ 1918 review” is that it seems to have happened a century ago!

Admin
Reader

No one can say the man doesn’t plan ahead! 🙂

Typo fixed now with apologies from us.

onceagain489
Reader

Thanks, OffG for putting this up. Not that I needed it, but it’s a great Public Service.

Jerry Alatalo
Reader

Get the subpoenas ready for distribution… These war criminals are going down.

axisofoil
Reader

Don’t get your hopes up. We just watched a half million Syrians butchered with our tax dollars.We ate pop corn . We still have the School of the Americas. We still vote for the better of 2 evils. The values bar is now flush with the floor, so at least we are not guilty. We are irreverent by choice. It’s easier….and safer. Grab a beer. Who is going to issue those subpoenas anyway? Walt Disney?

Jerry Alatalo
Reader

Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry.

axisofoil
Reader

Our so called civilized world would collapse if it prosecuted itself. This won’t happen. My cynicism is based on my personal experiences with the human species. Our values are such that we are easily manipulated by psychopaths. What do you think might have happened if the occupy movement had fixated on only one demand………NO PROFITS OF WAR? Maybe some light shed on our real values? The equitable share of the 1%s wealth that Occupy felt belonged to them was looked at from a purely selfish perspective. The stench of human carnage in which that profit wallowed was not even considered.… Read more »

Mulga Mumblebrain
Reader
Mulga Mumblebrain

The Western ‘Rules Based International Order’ is utterly destructive, utterly Evil and utterly irredeemable. The idea that it can be reformed and turned into something other than utter malevolence is seriously mistaken.

writerroddis
Reader
writerroddis

“This kind of reversal is one of the things that my co-author and I hoped would be produced by our book. We had long known that the evidence against the official account of 9/11 is convincing.”

Well what can I say, David? For those who regard truthism as article of religious faith my turnaround could never be good enough. More astute truthers, however, will see the value of a gamekeeper turned poacher! May sales soar in the way your and Elizabeth’s book deserves.

iafantomo
Reader

Well done! See ‘Gekaufte Journalisten’ by Udo Ulfkotte (https://www.kopp-verlag.de/Gekaufte-Journalisten.htm). If anyone would like to take part in translating it I have contacts with a publisher who is keen and has the rights from Kopp-Verlag. Ian (at) Fantom (.org.uk)

tael
Reader
tael

OffG, this is huge, thank You, thank You David & You Elizabeth ! As ever Surface the equations: truth x time x denial x education x culture of hypocrisy. This may be the turning point. A lot of people perceived evil at work in their gut from the start and as a society it is quite shameful, hurting to say the least, to have to live through all of it. Personally I feel quite sick about the ease how the public deniers who earned their wage by doing so will get away with rationalising apologies while shame and a long… Read more »

harry stotle
Reader
harry stotle

No doubt Monbiot’s blindness to 9/11 was a factor in his uncritical acceptance of imperial propaganda such as the ‘White Helmets’ narrative or the Assad ‘gassed his own people’ trope. In fact its pretty much axiomatic that those too blinkered to see 9/11 as a colossal lie (since the official conspiracy myth is bereft of even the most rudimentary forms of reason or logic) are those most likely to unquestioningly buy into the endless stream of propaganda fed to our media by government agencies in order to rationalise international conflicts and with it appalling human rights abuses. Of course any… Read more »

flaxgirl
Reader

Monbiot is a complete disgrace.

axisofoil
Reader

Hi flaxgirl. Our lives are a disgrace, but then there is this……https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPJl2e38S4g

Ross Hendry
Reader

Agreed. I think many of us knew that 9/11 was deep state event at the time it happened, even before the false narrative started coming out (which was very soon)..It was all so unlikely and cinematic. But then those of us of a certain age are suitably cynical, having had the “advantage” of seeing the JFK assassination on TV and immediately knowing, for much the same reasons,thatwas a deep state action. (Monbiot was only 10 months old at the time and he’s still as naive.).

TFS
Reader
TFS

This is what so called Truthers/Conspiracy Theorists are up against: https://www.alternet.org/story/100688/the_ultimate_9_11_%27truth%27_showdown%3A_david_ray_griffin_vs._matt_taibbi What would have been nice would be if DRG had turned the tables of Matt and asked him to justify his support of the Official Conspiracy Theory on 9/11. Also, its nearly 20yrs since 9/11 happened. What new techniques are there that could be bought to bear on the investigation? Well for a start MIT released a piece of software technology years ago which could detect and amplify small movements in videos (in the demo,detecting a babies heartbeat). I wonder if it could be used to detect the shaking… Read more »

flaxgirl
Reader

It’s very interesting how people have no trouble coming up with claptrap to argue against another’s explanation but when asked to provide an explanation for their own belief, they’re left like a gaping fish out of water. Yes, it’s a very good idea to ask people to defend their own belief because so often they can’t come up with two words to do so. No more techniques are required. 9/11 may well be the greatest case of the Emperor’s New Clothes the world has ever known. The book has way beyond more than enough information to prove that 9/11 was… Read more »

axisofoil
Reader

There is also the twin tower antenna that vaporizes in front of our eyes, It turns to dust in mid air. Clever. Red herrings were everywhere that day. We will still find more. Like an Easter egg hunt. Somebody is having fun. Meanwhile………
.

flaxgirl
Reader

On second thoughts perhaps the insider was lying and the power elite don’t justify their crimes by signalling them for us to call them out, they simply enjoy the ability their power allows them to push their crimes in our face with absurdity upon absurdity without fear of suffering the consequences of them. Of course, either way they do have a blast pushing their crimes in our face, no doubt about that. An example that makes me laugh myself is the cat and two guinea pigs among all the other Skripal nonsense.

TFS
Reader
TFS

What’s out there is already proof enough to dispel the Official Governments Conspiracy Theory, granted The example suggested is just another ‘forensic tool’ that could be applied to the scene of the crime that was recorded from multiple sources. ‘You say no bombs were heard. I say play the recordings’. ‘You say yeah but that’s just internal mechanisms within the damaged buildings causing the sounds. I say analyze the video’. There is always new techniques to apply to old crimes. Think JFK assassination analysis has ceased? Still waiting for the experiment proving ‘back and to the left’, from the shot… Read more »

Rhisiart Gwilym
Reader
Rhisiart Gwilym

The three thoroughly-proven – sic! – controlled demolitions are all the evidence that’s needed. Grant them, and the whole false-flag hypothesis is clinched, right there.

wittym
Reader
wittym

Apart from many audio/video recordings and dozens and dozens of eye-witness testimony, the pre-attack and pre-collapse explosions were detected by USGS seismic recorders in New Jersey.

Facts and data don’t matter though, the truth is what they say it will be no matter how unbelievable.

wittym
Reader
wittym

It is remarkable to me how little, facts or Science count in people’s minds, even in a civilized, educated place like Britain. The buildings could not have accelerated toward the ground at the rate they did according to laws of Physics you would learn in GCE O level and hopefully still do. When they actually look at the data, 99% of Engineers, Chemists, Architects, Pilots, Air Traffic controllers, Fire/explosive-experts and 100% of controlled demolition technicians know that the official story is not at all credible even as left field theory, it is in fact, an interwoven list of base-less, completely… Read more »

vexarb
Reader
vexarb

“The truth rarely if ever convinces its opponents; it simply outlives them”. — “Mad” Max Planck.

Here we have a clear example of the rare exception: truth convincing an opponent. Hurrah for writer Griffin, hurrah for writer Oddis!

TFS
Reader
TFS

Corbett report has some good easy digestible videos on 9/11

https://www.corbettreport.com/9-11-war-games/

TFS
Reader
TFS

Here’s a lovely example of the Smithsonian channel pulling a fast one.

Go to 3:30 and check out the cartoon.

An then look at google:

https://www.google.com/search?safe=strict&client=firefox-b&biw=1920&bih=879&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=lSqrW6r_KuHPgAbQs4zYCw&q=wtc+tower+2+collapse&oq=wtc+tower+2+collapse&gs_l=img.3..0.32373.40352.0.40464.35.29.0.6.6.0.91.1972.28.28.0….0…1c.1.64.img..1.10.327…0i24k1j0i30k1.0.GQ3m874fkxk#imgrc=VAq1LstgWxhwXM:

Yep. The top of WTC 2, is falling off to the side. The Smithsonian cartoon is at odds with reality. Of course mentioning this will get your comment shadow banned in relation to that particular video.

Anyone up for getting the data and analysis they used for their recreation?

Truthers……..

Rhisiart Gwilym
Reader
Rhisiart Gwilym

Unqualified respect to David RG, as ever. He will be remembered, when the true history of 11/9 (I’m British!) is established as the universally-accepted account, as the great, unfailingly-steady rock against which the ridiculous truth-rubbishing, due-diligence-failing ‘pundits’ dashed themselves so ineffectually. Belated kudos to Roddis, for having the honesty to shift position because of the effect of real evidence, and for having the balls to admit it in public. I was one of those who ridiculed his original fatally ill-informed article trashing the truth movement. Glad to withdraw that condemnation now. Welcome to the reality-based community on 11/9 Philip! As… Read more »

Chris
Reader
Chris

It is a pity more Americans couldn’t be convinced to stop using the American ordering of dates because quite apart from being less logical than the British ordering, the date of 9/11 appears to have been chosen precisely because the sickos behind the event deliberately decided to use a number which would be imprinted on all Americans because of their phone emergency number 9-1-1. As Flaxgirl notes above referencing Ole Dammegard, “the power elite (essentially a weird global cult of super rich, powerful and depraved people who engage in weird and criminal ritualistic practices including human sacrifice) justify their crimes… Read more »

axisofoil
Reader

Check out April 19th

Rhisiart Gwilym
Reader
Rhisiart Gwilym

PS: Congratulations and respect to the Off-Graun editors too, for the intellectually-honest, meticulous, and genuinely open and even-handed way that you’ve handled this tricky issue. You put the corporate-media whores to utter shame with your proper professionalism!

willi uebelherr
Reader
willi uebelherr

Dear friends, dear David Griffin, I didn’t read the book. I just read the text by Philip Roddis. But my first question doesn’t come up: Is it physically possible that a aluminum airplane with a body and wings of aluminum is able to cut through all the steel beams like butter on the entire width? Is it physically possible that a aluminum airplane with a body and wings of aluminum is able to go through a whole with 5 m diameter? If we don’t find a valuable answer to this question we have never discuss about temperature or fire or… Read more »

mog
Reader

Some in the 9/11 research community have tackled this issue:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200610/Salter.pdf

The key concept is the amount of energy in a fast moving aircraft. This video for example, shows how a one gram foam ‘nerf dart’ can be shot through a 3/4 inch piece of solid pine board, if you accelerate it fast enough:

willi uebelherr
Reader
willi uebelherr

Dear mog, we speak here about physiks, about kinetic energy. and this is always relative. If two materials come togeher with a relative speed, only the material structures defined the result. Never who stay or moved to or against the other.

flaxgirl
Reader

So in a collision between a Mack truck and a sedan, would you make a different choice depending on which vehicle is going at 100km and which is stationary?

mog
Reader

It’s not an argument of absolutes. If the towers were made of aluminium the planes (it is argued) would have caused much more damage, likewise if the planes (absurdly) were made of steel. If the planes were going slower into the actual (steel) towers, they would have caused a whole lot less damage. Blancmange doesnt do my knee much harm when I drop it from my spoon. If I shot blancmange at the speed of sound at my knee, I would lose my kneecap most likely. That’s how I understand it. I am not a physicist, I linked to what… Read more »

wittym
Reader
wittym

It doesn’t matter which is stationary. Two objects collided relative to each other. In fact, the Trade Centers were not stationary. Not to be pedantic, they were spinning with the earth’s rotation, flying around the sun and around the center of the milky way. Just to demonstrate it is their relative motion of the colliding objects to each other that counts, whichever was moving or if both are moving. There is no absolute reference grid in space to measure whether you are stationary or moving with constant velocity. If you are in a sedan travelling at a constant velocity, and… Read more »

axisofoil
Reader

Ok, so what about bldg7?

mog
Reader

What about building 7 ?
WTC 7 wasn’t hit by a plane, I thought the question was about what hit the towers.

axisofoil
Reader

Question?

axisofoil
Reader

This is an important documentary. Long, but worth it. You may not accept everything said, but there are some eye opening moments. Really.

Ross Hendry
Reader

Thanks for the video link. It seems to be unavailable in the U.K., but this one works: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqxq03izxrQ&t=0m0s

Hugh O'Neill
Reader
Hugh O'Neill

David Ray Griffin, your gentle patience and scholarly dedication show Mankind at his level best in confronting Totalitarian crimes and propaganda. It is interesting how Roddis changed his mind due to the gentlemanly attitude of some who dare question the official account. (Note to self: be gentle and less impassioned) By conscious choice, I try to avoid exposure to MSM propaganda but had no concept of 9/11 as Psy-Op until listening to a 2009 Radio NZ interview (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArLe__a_VaY) when Kim Hill attacked relentlessly the impeccably polite Richard Gage. (It was her condescending hostility which alerted me to a bigger story).… Read more »

mick
Reader
mick

Kim Hill didn’t do any research before the interview with Richard Gage. It showed in her comments. The thing I an so surprised at about 911 over the last 17 years is how the Israeli involvement has been ignored. People say ‘somebody on the inside would have talked’ if it was an inside job but here we see evidence in the ‘public domain’ about Israelis arrested and found to have had prepositioned cameras before the first plane hit the North Tower and even a moving van full of explosives in New York on 911 driven by an Israeli agent. Both… Read more »

phahrenheit451
Reader

I would sooner blame Mega Transnational Corporations. Israel wasn’t the only one to benefit from 9/11. The old money like the Rockefellers, Vanderbilts and JP Morgan didn’t go away they are still in power.

phahrenheit451
Reader

Those who control the energy control the people. But those who control their perception control everything. Wake up sheeple🐏and read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO ❓ Don’t be afraid of the truth. In the electronic age knowledge is a choice.